Module 5 Case Research Ethics Case Assignment: Use The Infor ✓ Solved
Module 5 Case Research Ethics Case Assignment: Use the inform
Module 5 Case Research Ethics Case Assignment: Use the information provided in the readings to write a 3- to 5-page paper that discusses the ethical considerations for quantitative, qualitative, and action/evaluation research designs. Explain the purpose of an Institutional Review Board (IRB). In your own words, describe the steps of the IRB process at TUI and provide a summary of the components required in the IRB application at TUI. Reflect on your proposed TAD and discuss two steps in the IRB process that you had not yet considered or two components of the application that you had not yet considered. How will you address those steps or components?
Paper For Above Instructions
Introduction and overview. Ethical research practice requires careful attention to how research designs—quantitative, qualitative, and action/evaluation—interact with the rights and welfare of participants. Across all designs, researchers must anticipate risks, protect privacy, obtain informed consent where appropriate, and plan for responsible data handling. Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) exist to assess and monitor these protections, balancing the potential benefits of knowledge with the obligation to minimize harm. This paper discusses ethical considerations across the three design typologies, explains the purpose and role of the IRB, outlines the IRB process steps at TUI and the components required in the IRB application, and reflects on a proposed TAD (Transformative/Targeted Action Design) with two newly considered IRB steps or components and how to address them.
Ethical considerations by research design. In quantitative studies, risks are often related to privacy, confidentiality, and the potential misuse of data. Even when procedures involve minimal risk, data security, de-identification, and secure storage are essential. Informed consent remains crucial, particularly when data are sensitive or when participants might be compelled to participate by power dynamics (for example, students or employees). Beneficence and nonmaleficence require researchers to minimize risk while maximizing potential benefits, and to clearly articulate how data will be used, stored, and shared (Belmont Report, 1979; 45 CFR 46).
Qualitative research emphasizes depth of understanding and context, but it also raises distinct ethical considerations. Issues of confidentiality can be more complex due to rich, identifiable contextual details. Researchers must negotiate informed consent for audio/video recordings and potential disclosures of sensitive information. Reflexivity—acknowledging the researcher’s influence on data and interpretation—helps address biases and power dynamics. Plans for preserving confidentiality, managing sensitive topics, and handling incidental findings are essential (Patton, 2002; Flick, 2018).
Action/evaluation research, which engages with practitioners, communities, or institutions to improve programs or policy, carries ethical implications related to stakeholder relationships and potential unintended consequences. Researchers must consider the possibility that findings could affect participants or communities beyond the study, manage conflicts of interest, and communicate results responsibly to avoid misapplication or stigmatization. Ensuring that results are used to benefit participants or communities—while safeguarding privacy and consent—remains central (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, & Turner, 2007).
Purpose and role of the IRB. The IRB exists to protect human subjects by ensuring that research risks are minimized and reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits, that selection of subjects is equitable, and that informed consent and privacy protections are appropriately implemented (Belmont Report, 1979; 45 CFR 46). The IRB reviews study protocols, consent documents, recruitment materials, and data management plans to verify that protections are in place and that investigators have the competence to carry out the research ethically (OHRP, 2016/2020).
IRB process steps at TUI and components of the IRB application. The IRB review process typically follows these steps: (1) determination of whether the project involves human subjects and whether IRB review is required; (2) submission of an IRB application with a clear description of purpose, design, population, recruitment, data collection procedures, risk/benefit assessment, privacy and confidentiality protections, data handling and storage, and consent processes; (3) initial review by the IRB, which may be exempt, expedited, or full board, depending on risk level; (4) potential requests for revisions or additional information from the IRB; (5) approval with specified conditions and a planned period for continuing review; and (6) ongoing monitoring and final closeout. At TUI, the IRB application typically requires a detailed overview of the study, purpose and significance, design and methods, participant population and recruitment strategies, consent procedures, risk assessment and protection measures, data management and privacy plans, researcher qualifications, and timing or milestones. Additionally, researchers may need to address data sharing, publication plans, and any potential conflicts of interest (Belmont Report, 1979; 45 CFR 46; OHRP IRB Guidebook).
Reflection on proposed TAD and two newly considered IRB steps/components. In planning a Transformative/Targeted Action Design (TAD), two components often require deeper attention than initial drafts reflect: (a) data security and retention for potentially identifiable information, including encryption, access controls, and timelines for de-identification and destruction; and (b) dissemination and use of findings, including plans for stakeholder engagement, community benefit, and safeguards against misuse of results. Addressing these steps involves (i) constructing a robust data management plan, detailing who can access data, where and how data are stored, how identifiers are removed or masked, retention periods, and procedures for secure destruction; and (ii) outlining an explicit dissemination plan that identifies stakeholders, channels for communication, and safeguards to prevent stigmatization or harm. Additionally, integrating a consent or assent process that clearly explains potential data sharing or use in future studies helps to align with ethical expectations (APA Ethics Code; Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Conclusion. Ethical research requires proactive planning that anticipates risks and protects participants across quantitative, qualitative, and action/evaluation designs. The IRB process at TUI provides a framework to ensure these protections are in place before research begins and throughout the project lifecycle. By addressing data security and dissemination responsibilities early in the planning phase—especially for innovative designs like TAD—researchers can uphold ethical principles while pursuing rigorous, impactful scholarship.